Who Told Vorderman People Care What She...
News1 min ago
In todays
62 Answers
modern world, where the accepted definition of sin has become blurred, we need to protect ourselves against an over-zealous deity keen to promote an out-dated set of rules.
Who agrees?
Who agrees?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by MWB. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
FarKenOath really is an unpleasant fellow, isn't he?
MWB's question is perfectly reasonable one. Though I would say that the protection we need is not against a deity, for whose existence there is no evidence, but against his more extreme followers.
And of course the 'rules' are out-dated: there is no mention of rape or child-abuse because the Old Testament makes it clear that such things were perfectly acceptable in the days when the commandments were written.
As I have said before, FarKenOath, you need to employ more reason and debate and less loud-mouthed abuse.
MWB's question is perfectly reasonable one. Though I would say that the protection we need is not against a deity, for whose existence there is no evidence, but against his more extreme followers.
And of course the 'rules' are out-dated: there is no mention of rape or child-abuse because the Old Testament makes it clear that such things were perfectly acceptable in the days when the commandments were written.
As I have said before, FarKenOath, you need to employ more reason and debate and less loud-mouthed abuse.
If the rules are outdated then you were following the wrong rules. If the rules were from an outdated deity then you were following a wrong deity too.
However to test and trial few rules you may have to look at the consequences after having them changed. And if you do that with open mind as well as open eyes, that would help too.
However to test and trial few rules you may have to look at the consequences after having them changed. And if you do that with open mind as well as open eyes, that would help too.
-- answer removed --
No I don't agree.
Firstly sin is not blurred - it is non existant - it is an offence against God - No God no sin.
Also we don't need to protect ourselves against a non-existant deity, but we do need to be on guard against the minority who want religion in public life.
Those who want Bishops in Parliament, religious assemblies in schools and those who want public money to fund religious schools.
Firstly sin is not blurred - it is non existant - it is an offence against God - No God no sin.
Also we don't need to protect ourselves against a non-existant deity, but we do need to be on guard against the minority who want religion in public life.
Those who want Bishops in Parliament, religious assemblies in schools and those who want public money to fund religious schools.
Jake, you don�t arf talk about that a lot. Are you doing anything about it directly with this �minority� or just repeating it endlessly on an internet forum in the hope that it will change the world?
To sin is to err against your religion. If you don�t have religion then you won�t have sin. That doesn�t seem too blurred to me.
I would imagine most people would align it to a moral code of conduct or suchlike, but if you find the meaning of that ambiguous, then you�ll just have to take your chances
To sin is to err against your religion. If you don�t have religion then you won�t have sin. That doesn�t seem too blurred to me.
I would imagine most people would align it to a moral code of conduct or suchlike, but if you find the meaning of that ambiguous, then you�ll just have to take your chances
For those who seek a knowledge and understanding of right from wrong; look neither to self-proclaimed nor mob instituted rulers but instead to the author and final arbiter of the absolute laws which sustain and promote the existence of those who subscribe to and abide by them, from which only a reasoned comprehension of the nature of reality such can be ascertained.
Those who seek an �easier solution� to the problem, for whom the labour of thinking has grown in proportion to their lack of exercising the art of reason, have become victims of their own inability to envision and subsequent blindness to the values to be obtained by virtue of that requisite process.
Those who lust after the intellectual profits of the sages throughout the ages and whose hope is to cash in on the prize they acknowledge implicitly, without paying the price of an explicit understanding, will fail to distill from scriptures the wisdom that lies hopelessly obscured within. We all, each of us according to our individual ability through acknowledgement of our need to practice reason, reap what we have sown.
Those who seek an �easier solution� to the problem, for whom the labour of thinking has grown in proportion to their lack of exercising the art of reason, have become victims of their own inability to envision and subsequent blindness to the values to be obtained by virtue of that requisite process.
Those who lust after the intellectual profits of the sages throughout the ages and whose hope is to cash in on the prize they acknowledge implicitly, without paying the price of an explicit understanding, will fail to distill from scriptures the wisdom that lies hopelessly obscured within. We all, each of us according to our individual ability through acknowledgement of our need to practice reason, reap what we have sown.
As usual MWB you only answer the questions that don't tax your wee brain too much. I posted the following questions which you are yet to answer, though I am sure one of your heros will jump to your defence seeing as I am such an unpleasant fellow.
If YOU don't believe in a God then why do you feel the need to protect yourself from one? Who is the great "we" that you seem to be the spokesperson for?
Are you planning on giving up Easter & Christmas hols (that means holidays MWB, are you planning on working through Christmas & Easter or do you sponge off the taxpayer)
If YOU don't believe in a God then why do you feel the need to protect yourself from one? Who is the great "we" that you seem to be the spokesperson for?
Are you planning on giving up Easter & Christmas hols (that means holidays MWB, are you planning on working through Christmas & Easter or do you sponge off the taxpayer)
-- answer removed --
The concept of sin is non-existent to the non-religious, and therefore to them the definition cannot become blurred. For the religious, I don't believe the concept of sin has become blurred. They are as superstitious, and as terrified of the empty threat of divine retribution as ever they were. Even for those who aren't thoroughly devout now, but have nevertheless been indoctrinated at some time in the past, that lingering fear remains embedded somewhere in the recesses of their minds. It isn't the over-zealous imaginary deities non-believers need to protect themselves from, but the malignant and damaging influence of those who attempt to undermine the intellect of free-thinking individuals by propounding the dubious benefits of religion in any shape or form.
Incidentally, it's a perfectly reasonable question. R&S is a place where religion is freely discussed from all angles and from all points of view - and long may it remain so.
Incidentally, it's a perfectly reasonable question. R&S is a place where religion is freely discussed from all angles and from all points of view - and long may it remain so.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
News4 mins ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Starmer In Jobs Push.....right Oh!
News12 mins ago
